Loïc Rémy

[Muzchap 8,966]

Loic Remy or Falcao?

Is there even a choice?

[Las7 951]

Like I've said it's pointless to sign someone who is 25 y/o to be a Torres back up we have Lukaku on loan - we won't play with 2 strikers up top with the current players we possess - and Remy for 15 million pounds is not a good value considering the type of forward we need.

Any parallels between Remy and Drogba are ill advised - Drogba had lead OM to a victory in the Europa/UEFA Cup before signing with us and he had far too many qualities that interested Jose. Compare Remy to other French League forwards who have recently come to England - Giroud; Maiga; Chamakh; Gervinho etc not exactly good track records. We need someone proven in Europe, rather than a striker banging goals in lesser leagues - hell Remy isn't even that prolific.

[nadavTKL 1,787]

I think we should see how Sturridge performs at CF with the likes of Hazard, Oscar, Mata feeding him wonderful passes before we try to sign a 2nd/3rd choice striker in January.

I fully agree on that.

[nadavTKL 1,787]

The players that are right for us and will suit the champions of Europe are only 2, Falcao and Cavani.We should only get the cherry of the talents - Hazard, Oscar.And only the best proved players, just like Barca and Real de Madrid.

"he can be a good fit for us." is not good enough.

Ofcourse if RDM thinks he will be good for our squad ill back him.

But we are talking about January, and "Loic Remy or Falcao" is realy not the question to ask. if you dont belive what Atletico's general manager said (that they wont sell him in Jan for sure), than you probably gonna be very disappointed. There is no point for them to sell in the middle of the season, none, its not even like the player wants to move in january (like Torres did). Atletico could get the same amount of money in the summer, even more.

And i dont agree that we need to get only the players who known has the best. Thats a stupid idea. Squad players are important, and Real and Barca get those players also. And those players can prove they are better than what you thought. If you belive to the rummurs, RDM did want him in the summer.

[Liquidator 5,176]

Love some of the blatantly obvious gloryhunters and plastics on this thread who say that only the likes of Cavani and Falcao are Chelsea material. There is something called taking a risk on a player? Its not Football Manager or FIFA where you can just spend £50m on a player when you feel like it. Mata was a good player when we got him. he wasn't one of the world's best quite but he was good. We could have spent £60m on Di Maria instead because he played for Real Madrid and therefore must have been 'Chelsea material'. Just because a player has a massive price tag, does not necessarily mean that they are better.

[Las7 951]

SeB who is going to cross?

Who in our current squad actually gets down to the byline and crosses.

Ivanovic is our best crosser of the ball, it's a pointless ploy - our squad as I've said earlier is not build for crossing - and it's pointless to do it if you only have one target in the box.

Why are we interested in a 25 year old who can improve, you think he would come here and magically improve against far better defenders than the one he faces in League One

Bring in a 18-23 y/o - "he could improve". At 25 years a player whose main assets are speed and heading ability cannot improve drastically and Remy would need to improve drastically if he is to be a part of the Champions of Europe - because currently there is no way I'd rate him higher potentially to Sturridge and Lukaku.

Love some of the blatantly obvious gloryhunters and plastics on this thread who say that only the likes of Cavani and Falcao are Chelsea material. There is something called taking a risk on a player? Its not Football Manager or FIFA where you can just spend £50m on a player when you feel like it. Mata was a good player when we got him. he wasn't one of the world's best quite but he was good. We could have spent £60m on Di Maria instead because he played for Real Madrid and therefore must have been 'Chelsea material'. Just because a player has a massive price tag, does not necessarily mean that they are better.

Mata was not a "good player" he was Valencia's best player at the time we signed him. There is a difference between being Valencia's best player and being a first team player in the French League.

My point is that we should not sign a player who would not be an improvement to what we already have within our squad - Lukaku and Sturridge. If you feel that makes me a gloryhunter that's fine by me.

[bababoom 4,478]

I would rather Messi or Ronaldo...

[Muzchap 8,966]

Love some of the blatantly obvious gloryhunters and plastics on this thread who say that only the likes of Cavani and Falcao are Chelsea material. There is something called taking a risk on a player? Its not Football Manager or FIFA where you can just spend £50m on a player when you feel like it. Mata was a good player when we got him. he wasn't one of the world's best quite but he was good. We could have spent £60m on Di Maria instead because he played for Real Madrid and therefore must have been 'Chelsea material'. Just because a player has a massive price tag, does not necessarily mean that they are better.

Nobody is saying that?

If money was the clue to how great a player was, then both Sheva and Torres would have been world beaters...

If I had the choice, I would choose Falcao over Remy.

I'm not saying Remy is a bad player, but just prefer Falcao - admittedly had limited exposure to both via TV and never in person...

Just nervous about our all eggs in one basket approach. Most top teams have 4 strikers, we have 1.5 (Torres and Studge - who despite promise, IS NOT proven there for CFC, sure he played well for Bolton, but they ain't CFC) I'm dismissing Piazon completely here as think he's fr the future...

[Rmpr 8,977]

I would rather Messi or Ronaldo...

I might get abused but I prefer for us to grow our own Messi/Ronaldo.

Neymar, Gotze, Hazard, Delofeu, El Sharaway...

[mediator 2,026]

Loic Remy who?

[RamiCFC9 258]

Football forums are so pointless really, how to argue with some1 is Loic Remy Chelsea material.How much more obvious it should be that HE ISN'T and not after 13713017703 words, 13618 sentences, 13434 false facts you will prove the opposite.He is fuking mediocre player in some 2nd rate league HOW THE FUCK IS HE SUPPOSED TO DO WELL HERE ? get a fuking grip.

[OneMoSalah 8,883]

Don't see why we shouldn't press ahead with this deal if he is less than 12 million euros. Ok hes not Falcao, hes not Messi, hes not anything great in particular I even said I don't think hes great a few pages back but for a back up and as SeB posted up his strike rate despite not playing centrally is similar to Sturridge's from last season so why not? Point is if we get an injury to Torres and Sturridge plays utter bollocks we are fucked (yes we are fucked without Torres somehow ), nobody has seen Sturridge play as a CF in this current Chelsea side he could play there and be utter bullshit as well for all we know. Lemy has a bit of experience compared to Sturridge, which isn't vitally important but it could be. Lemy has led the line plenty of times before in big games where as Sturridge hasn't. Sturridge's attributes suit a winger more imo right now but he won't get picked there because we effectively have a wingless formation. Its not just about getting 3 world class strikers in the whole time to rotate them, maybe we need a okish player who is willing to sit on the bench for a while and do a job when called upon, who remembers Salomon Kalou with his important last minute goals? Point is if he's available on a cheapish price we should take a gamble. I'm not necessarily saying quantity over quality I'm just saying that there were rumblings about big clubs watching Remy a few years back, what's so different now hes a few years older? Surely he'd only be better?

[Las7 951]

Don't see why we shouldn't press ahead with this deal if he is less than 12 million euros. Ok hes not Falcao, hes not Messi, hes not anything great in particular I even said I don't think hes great a few pages back but for a back up and as SeB posted up his strike rate despite not playing centrally is similar to Sturridge's from last season so why not? Point is if we get an injury to Torres and Sturridge plays utter bollocks we are fucked (yes we are fucked without Torres somehow ), nobody has seen Sturridge play as a CF in this current Chelsea side he could play there and be utter bullshit as well for all we know. Lemy has a bit of experience compared to Sturridge, which isn't vitally important but it could be. Lemy has led the line plenty of times before in big games where as Sturridge hasn't. Sturridge's attributes suit a winger more imo right now but he won't get picked there because we effectively have a wingless formation. Its not just about getting 3 world class strikers in the whole time to rotate them, maybe we need a okish player who is willing to sit on the bench for a while and do a job when called upon, who remembers Salomon Kalou with his important last minute goals? Point is if he's available on a cheapish price we should take a gamble. I'm not necessarily saying quantity over quality I'm just saying that there were rumblings about big clubs watching Remy a few years back, what's so different now hes a few years older? Surely he'd only be better?

1) His price is 15 million pounds

2) He is not more experienced than Sturridge, people here have said he is playing in a similar position as Sturridge/Moses a wide forward position cutting in from the wing and sometimes spearheading the attack. Sturridge has played as a forward in the EPL, something which obviously French League players struggle to do when arriving in England - tell me the last successful French League striker in the EPL - or should I jog your memory it was Drogba but Drogba proved his worth by helping Marseille to a Europa/Uefa Triumph before being signed by us. Sturridge was scoring at a good rate at Bolton against the same defenders we face on a weekly basis - it's management's problem that they do not want to give him a shot. Sturridge scored 11 League Goals last season while Remy's highest total in the French League is 15 and I doubt anyone would contest that EPL is tougher league than League One.

3) Big clubs watched Remy and decided against purchasing him, he was signed my Marseille for a reported 15 million euro and if they are willing to sell him for less it would mean they don't see him improving much at a new club.

4) Difference between Kalou and Remy is age, at Kalou's age he could still improve at Remy's age there is little room for improvement - especially for a player who's main assets are speed and heading ability.

Don't get me wrong if Remy is available for under 10 million pounds we should go for it, but paying more than 10 million for a squad player is just a bad decision.

[Jase 43,479]

2) He is not more experienced than Sturridge, people here have said he is playing in a similar position as Sturridge/Moses a wide forward position cutting in from the wing and sometimes spearheading the attack. Sturridge has played as a forward in the EPL, something which obviously French League players struggle to do when arriving in England - tell me the last successful French League striker in the EPL - or should I jog your memory it was Drogba but Drogba proved his worth by helping Marseille to a Europa/Uefa Triumph before being signed by us. Sturridge was scoring at a good rate at Bolton against the same defenders we face on a weekly basis - it's management's problem that they do not want to give him a shot. Sturridge scored 11 League Goals last season while Remy's highest total in the French League is 15 and I doubt anyone would contest that EPL is tougher league than League One.

So, just because there aren't too many strikers that came from Ligue 1 and had success in the Premier League in recent times, you're just gonna assume anyone who come from there is gonna ultimately fail too? Good generalization there.

And Drogba helped Marseille to a UEFA Cup/Europa League triumph? The only European trophy Marseille have won in recent years is the Intertoto Cup and that was in 2005 after he had already joined us!

3) Big clubs watched Remy and decided against purchasing him, he was signed my Marseille for a reported 15 million euro and if they are willing to sell him for less it would mean they don't see him improving much at a new club.

Ever thought maybe the supposed low price for Remy is because of the contract length he has left with Marseille?

4) Difference between Kalou and Remy is age, at Kalou's age he could still improve at Remy's age there is little room for improvement - especially for a player who's main assets are speed and heading ability.

Kalou is already 27 and Remy is only 25.

[Las7 951]

So, just because there aren't too many strikers that came from Ligue 1 and had success in the Premier League in recent times, you're just gonna assume anyone who come from there is gonna ultimately fail too? Good generalization there.

Until a striker that has done well in the French League actually does well here I'm going to assume that either French League is worse defensivly or League One strikers have a hard time adapting. I'm not opposed to signing a League One striker provided he is young enough and talented enough to improve here rather than sign as a squad player who is in no way shape or form better than Lukaku and Sturridge.

And Drogba helped Marseille to a UEFA Cup/Europa League triumph? The only European trophy Marseille have won in recent years is the Intertoto Cup and that was in 2005 after he had already joined us!

My bad, they lost the final to Valencia - still made it far further into the European Cups than OM has done since than and Drogba had 11 goals in 16 appearance in Europe that season, showing far more to a wider audience than Remy.

Ever thought maybe the supposed low price for Remy is because of the contract length he has left with Marseille?

His contract expires in the summer of 2015

Which basically means if OM is looking to sell him for a lower price than what they paid - they don't think he is ever going to develop into a good enough player.

Kalou is already 27 and Remy is only 25.

You are unable to read I said

"4) Difference between Kalou and Remy is age, at Kalou's age he could still improve at Remy's age there is little room for improvement - especially for a player who's main assets are speed and heading ability."

When we signed Kalou he was 21 year old - if we sign Remy he will be 26 year old ? At 21 Kalou could have become a good player for us, for 9 million pound it wasn't much of a risk - he turned out decent but never lived up to his potential - Remy at 25 could not possibly improve substantially considering his main assets are speed and aerial ability.